Skip to main content
Glama

Revit MCP

by io.scanbimlabs

revit_get_elements

When to use: After a Revit model has finished translating, fetch the first ~100 elements belonging to a Revit category (e.g. Walls, Doors, Windows, Structural Columns) with their objectid, name, externalId, and property bag. When NOT to use: Do not call before translation completes (manifest.status must be success), and do not use for free-text searches across the whole model — filter by category here or use revit_run_schedule for tabular views. APS scopes: data:read viewables:read (Model Derivative metadata + properties). Rate limits: APS default ~50 req/min per app per endpoint; Model Derivative translation jobs ~60 req/min; OSS uploads size-limited per file to 100MB for direct upload, larger via resumable. Errors: 401 APS token expired — refresh. 403 scope insufficient — add viewables:read. 404 URN not found — confirm model_id and that translation has run. 429 rate limited — back off. 5xx APS upstream — retry with jitter. Side effects: Read-only. Idempotent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryYesRevit category name to filter on (case-insensitive substring match). Use canonical Revit category names like Walls, Doors, Windows, Structural Columns, Ducts, Pipes, Mechanical Equipment.
model_idYesBase64url-encoded URN of the translated Revit model (returned from revit_upload as model_id/urn). Always begins with 'dXJu' (base64 of 'urn:').

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / category / description
      Previous value: -"Revit category to filter (e.g. 'Walls', 'Doors', 'Windows', 'Structural Columns')"New value: +"Revit category name to filter on (case-insensitive substring match). Use canonical Revit category names like Walls, Doors, Windows, Structural Columns, Ducts, Pipes, Mechanical Equipment."
    • addedInput schema / properties / category / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "Walls"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / model_id / description
      Previous value: -"Base64-encoded URN of the translated model"New value: +"Base64url-encoded URN of the translated Revit model (returned from revit_upload as model_id/urn). Always begins with 'dXJu' (base64 of 'urn:')."
    • addedInput schema / properties / model_id / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "dXJuOmFkc2sub2JqZWN0czpvcy5vYmplY3Q6c2NhbmJpbS1yZXZpdC0xNzMxMjM0NTY3L015QnVpbGRpbmcucnZ0"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / model_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^dXJu[A-Za-z0-9_-]+$"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and delivers. It discloses read-only and idempotent side effects, a ~100 element limit, APS rate limits, detailed error codes with corrective actions, and the prerequisite of successful translation. This is far beyond what a schema reveals.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with labeled sections (When to use, When NOT to use, APS scopes, Rate limits, Errors, Side effects), making it easy to scan. It includes some extraneous details (e.g., OSS upload size limits) that are not directly relevant to this read-only fetch tool, but overall it is efficient for the complexity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It covers prerequisites, return field names, limits, error handling, and side effects. It even notes the approximate result count and model_id provenance. There are no major gaps for an agent to invoke and interpret results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (model_id, category) already well-documented including patterns, examples, and case-insensitive matching. The description adds little beyond the schema for parameter meaning; it repeats the canonical category names and URN prefix. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: fetch the first ~100 Revit elements of a given category with specific fields (objectid, name, externalId, property bag). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by noting it is for category filtering rather than free-text search, and contrasts with revit_run_schedule for tabular views. This is a specific verb+resource+scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, including a prerequisite (translation must be complete with manifest.status success) and direct alternatives (use revit_run_schedule for tabular views). This fully guides tool selection and execution timing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Revit MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: upload ingests, get_elements/get_parameters/get_sheets/get_views retrieve different types of data, run_schedule queries tabular views, clash_detect performs spatial analysis, and export_ifc converts formats. No two tools overlap in function; even get_sheets and get_views are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent revit_<verb> pattern in snake_case, with get_* for read operations and action verbs for other operations. The naming is predictable and uniform across the entire set.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and appropriately matches the server's scope of Revit model ingestion, exploration, analysis, and export. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers the core lifecycle (upload, read elements/parameters/sheets/views, run schedules, clash detect, export IFC), but there is no tool to check translation status or poll the manifest, which is referenced in descriptions but not provided. This is a notable gap that can cause agents to call read tools before translation completes, leading to failures.

Resources